~Testxs CE NP~Z1a~Flepfl
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Engagement Guidance on Corporate Tax Responsibility Why and How to Engage with Your Investee Companies
ENGAGEMENT GUIDANCE ON CORPORATE TAX RESPONSIBILITY WHY AND HOW TO ENGAGE WITH YOUR INVESTEE COMPANIES An investor initiative in partnership with UNEP Finance Initiative and UN Global Compact THE SIX PRINCIPLES We will incorporate ESG issues into investment analysis and 1 decision-making processes. We will be active owners and incorporate ESG issues into our 2 ownership policies and practices. We will seek appropriate disclosure on ESG issues by 3 the entities in which we invest. We will promote acceptance and implementation of the Principles 4 within the investment industry. We will work together to enhance our effectiveness in 5 implementing the Principles. We will each report on our activities and progress towards 6 implementing the Principles. CREDITS & ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Authors: Athanasia Karananou and Anastasia Guha, PRI Editor: Mark Kolmar, PRI Design: Alessandro Boaretto, PRI The PRI is grateful to the investor taskforce on corporate tax responsibility for their contributions to the guidance: ■ Harriet Parker, Investment Analyst, Alliance Trust Investments ■ Steven Bryce, Investment Analyst, Arisaig Partners (Asia) Pte Ltd ■ Francois Meloche, Extra Financial Risks Manager, Bâtirente ■ Adam Kanzer, Managing Director, Domini Social Investments LLC ■ Pauline Lejay, SRI Officer, ERAFP ■ Meryam Omi, Head of Sustainability, Legal & General Investment Management ■ Robert Wilson, Research Analyst, MFS Investment Management ■ Michelle de Cordova, Director, Corporate Engagement & Public Policy, NEI Investments ■ Rosa van den Beemt, ESG Analyst, NEI Investments ■ Kate Elliot, Ethical Researcher, Rathbone Brothers Plc ■ Matthias Müller, Senior SI Analyst, RobecoSAM ■ Rosl Veltmeijer, Head of Research, Triodos Investment Management We would like to warmly thank Sol Picciotto, Emeritus Professor, Lancaster University and Coordinator, BEPS Monitoring Group, and Katherine Ng, PRI, for their contribution to the guidance. -
Civil Disobedience from a Biblical Perspective
LIBERTY UNIVERISTY Submitted to Professor Fischer for the Journal of Statesmanship and Public Policy by Gabriel Z. Reed December 7th, 2020 Gabriel Z. Reed is an undergraduate student at Liberty University studying International Relations focusing on Strategic Intelligence, minoring in History. He intends to pursue a Master’s Degree in History at Liberty University. He served as a research assistant for the Family Foundation, and has a background in the ecclesiastical field. Introduction To say that civil disobedience is a complicated topic is to severely understate the topic. It is a subject matter that has derived many different and disparate opinions, points of view, and public policies. Specifically, within America today, we observe calls for civil disobedience from both sides of the political spectrum, over several divergent political ideals. These issues are, primarily, driven from both sides’ desire to provide protection and provision for the oppressed and those who cannot necessarily speak for themselves. The definition of who is necessarily oppressed and whom their oppressors are varies from person to person, regardless of political affiliation. At the present moment, the general consensus from either side of the fence appears to be that we are existing in an increasingly flawed system, and that there appears to be fewer and fewer ways to address it within the bounds of our current legal system. This has led both sides to take drastic measures increasingly outside the rule of law in order for their voices to be heard. For Judeo- Christians, this causes no small amount of conflict. What manner of steps should those of the mind to intervene for whatever issue they feel is pressing be capable of doing, within the moral framework of their own worldview? In this essay, these issues shall be examined, both with regards to our own American and Western history, and when it comes to Biblical viewpoints on such pressing matters. -
Love Your Enemies
By President Dallin H. Oaks First Counselor in the First Presidency said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. Love Your Enemies “But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use Knowing that we are all children of God gives us a you, and persecute you” (Matthew 5:43–44).1 vision of the worth of others and the ability to rise For generations, Jews had been taught to hate their enemies, and they above prejudice. were then suffering under the domi- nation and cruelties of Roman occu- pation. Yet Jesus taught them, “Love your enemies” and “do good to them The Lord’s teachings are for eternity spilled over into political statements that . despitefully use you.” and for all of God’s children. In this and unkind references in our Church What revolutionary teachings for message I will give some exam- meetings. personal and political relationships! ples from the United States, but the In a democratic government we But that is still what our Savior com- principles I teach are applicable will always have differences over mands. In the Book of Mormon we everywhere. proposed candidates and policies. read, “For verily, verily I say unto you, We live in a time of anger and However, as followers of Christ we he that hath the spirit of contention hatred in political relationships and must forgo the anger and hatred with is not of me, but is of the devil, who policies. -
Render Unto Caesar
RENDER UNTO CAESAR Weekly transmission 44-2017 presents: Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk... II Should we pay or shouldn't we? Permission to resist taxes ? III-IV Weekly Drawing by Théophile Bouchet: Jesus became indignant VI Rembrandt. The Tribute Money, original etching, 1634 1 Evocation de la vente du Cabinet Debois de 1844 3 Previous transmissions can be found at: www.plantureux.fr Matthew 22:15-22 — KJV [King James Version] 15. Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk. 16. And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men. 17. Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not? 18. But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites? 19. Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny. 20. And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? 21. They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's. 22. When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left him, and went their way. The e-bulletins present articles as well as selections of books, albums, photographs and documents as they have been handed down to the actual owners by their creators and by amateurs from past generations. -
THE LANGUAGE of TAX PROTESTS © Monica Haven, E.A
THE LANGUAGE OF TAX PROTESTS © Monica Haven, E.A. 120704 Language and the Law Professor Peter Tiersma Loyola Law School Fall 2004 Monica Haven [email protected] Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................... 1 A. The Purpose of Protest B. Philosophy of Protest C. Syllabus II. THE PRE-DETERMINED OUTCOME ................................................ 6 A. Tax Protesters Defined B. Judicial Response III. THE LANGUAGE OF PROTEST .......................................................... 8 A. Parsing The Code 1. “Individuals” Defined Statutory Definition Common Usage Trade Usage 2. “Income” Defined The Protester’s Misconstrued Precedent Quotes Taken Out Of Context The Burden Of Proof Is Improperly Shifted B. Common Defects IV. TAX SCAMS ........................................................................................... 19 V. JUDICIAL REASONING ...................................................................... 21 A. Historic Development B. Pre-empting Future Protests 1. Finding Support in Constitutional Construction 2. Applying the Plain Meaning Rule 3. Applicable Canons VI. JUDICIAL PREJUDICE ....................................................................... 30 A. Are Judges Passing The Buck? B. Are Judges Afraid? C. Protester Victories? 1. Retrials 2. Settlements 3. Criminal Convictions D. Victories Are Not Always What They Seem VII. CONCLUSION ....................................................................................... 36 i THE LANGUAGE -
GGD-81-83 Illegal Tax Protesters Threaten System
- ./ t REPORTBY THE Comptroller General OF THE UNITEDSTATES Illegal Tax Protesters Threaten Tax System The number of illegal tax protesters--persons who, according to IRS, advocate and/or use schemes to evade paying taxes--has increased significantly in recent years. Since they rep- resent a threat to our Nation’s voluntary tax system, IRS has taken some important counter measures, including the establishment of a high-priority Illegal Tax Protester Program and a program to prevent the filing of false Form W-4s, Employee’s Withholding Allow- ance Certificates. IRS has made some progress in detecting pro- testers and in deterring them through civil . , and criminal enforcement actions. However, it can further increase its effectiveness by in- vestigating protesters in a more timely manner and by making additional organizational and administrative changes. Also, the Congress can help by amending the summons provi- sions of the 1976 Ta Reform Act GGD-81-83 JULY 8.1981 COMPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED STATES WASHINGTON D.C. zo54a B-203682 The Honorable Benjamin S. Rosenthal Chairman, Subcommittee on Commerce, Consumer and Monetary Affairs Committee on Government Operations House of Representatives Dear Mr. Chairman: This report, in response to your request, discusses the nature and extent of.the illegal tax protest problem and the adequacy of the Internal Revenue Service's efforts to detect and deter illegal protesters. The report, which consists of the summary and comprehensive statements given in testimony before your subcommittee on June 10, 1981, makes several recommendations for improving IRS' efforts against illegal tax protesters. We did not obtain official comments from the Internal Rev- enue Service because of time limitations and because the Service had been asked to present its views at your subcommittee's hear- ing. -
Thoughts from Render Unto Caesar Serving the Nation by Living Our Catholic Beliefs in the Political Life by Frank Caliva
Thoughts from Render Unto Caesar Serving the Nation by Living Our Catholic Beliefs in the Political Life by Frank Caliva Discussions about politics and public life are often tricky, as many young people have strong opinions that reflect the deep political divisions in our country. Discussions can quickly turn emotional, and disagreements can move almost without warning from the abstract to the personal. Nevertheless, it is important for youth ministers to address our faith and public life, for at least two reasons. First, we live in the shadow of our nation’s capital, and political awareness is incredibly high among teens in the Diocese of Arlington. Second, and more importantly, this discussion is important because the act of participating in our own governance is not just a political right or a civic duty – it’s a moral responsibility.1 In 2008, during the hotly contested presidential election, the Most Rev. Charles J. Chaput, Archbishop of Denver, wrote a small but powerful book entitled, Render Unto Caesar. The book explores the complex relationship between our Catholic creed and our political beliefs. The idea that there is any relationship between faith and politics makes a lot of people, particularly in modern day America, very nervous. We have a long and proud tradition of religious freedom and tolerance in the United States, and this is a good thing. But in our concern about preventing one religion from dominating, perhaps we have gone to the other extreme, in which faith is entirely excluded from public life. Archbishop Chaput argues that this does not make a lot of sense if we take our faith seriously: People who take God seriously will not remain silent about their faith. -
Excuses—What Works and What Doesn’T © Monica Haven 010405
Excuses—what works and what doesn’t © Monica Haven 010405 Inez Morin complained, “It’s just a lot of paperwork.” Not surprisingly, the Tax Court did not rule favorably. Others contend that our system is based on voluntary compliance and conveniently overlook that “Congress gave the Secretary of Treasury the power to enforce the income tax laws through involuntary collection.” When their arguments fail, these recalcitrant taxpayers are dubbed as tax protesters. Monica Haven, E.A. will recount the often humorous and always creative arguments that have been litigated. I. The Philosophy of Protest Purpose: To lodge formal disapproval of public policies and persuade others to support the cause Tax protester seeks validation at the expense of society’s welfare To the extent that some people are dishonest or careless in their dealings with A. Tax Protest Defined the government, the majority is forced to Self-centered endeavor to evade tax liability carry a heavier tax burden. --John F. Kennedy Motivated by greed or anarchy Argued in bad faith The good faith defense encompasses a Based upon unsupportable positions misunderstanding of the law, not disagreement with the law. --Judge Meskill B. The Inevitable Outcome Judicial mandate to protect tax system for the support of government The government’s view of the budget is distorted because it includes Trust Funds (e.g. Social Security) and because the expenses of past military spending are not distinguished from nonmilitary spending These revised percentages do not include trust funds which are raised and spent separately from income taxes. The practice of combining trust and federal funds (the so-called “Unified Budget”) began in the 1960s during the Vietnam War and makes the human needs portion of the budget seem larger and the military portion smaller. -
“WHAT WE ARE to RENDER to CAESAR and GOD” (Matthew 22:15-22)
“WHAT WE ARE TO RENDER TO CAESAR AND GOD” (Matthew 22:15-22) The two subjects we’re told to avoid talking about is politics and religion. You can talk about the weather, you can talk about the grandkids, but stay away from politics and religion. We all know that talking about religion can stir up tension. You can be talking to someone about how the fishing is or the storm front that’s moving in, and things are breezy and light. But bring up God and suddenly the walls go up. How about politics? Right now, politics that may be even more divisive than religion, and arguing over politics is nothing new. In 1858 – just a few years before the Civil War – things got heated at a late-night session of congress where slavery and state’s rights were being debated. A Republican from Pennsylvania and a Democrat from South Carolina began insulting each other – imagine that – and soon they were shouting at each other, and then one of them threw a punch and a fist fight broke out right on the floor of the congress. 30 other congressmen left their seats and joined in on the fight before the sergeant-of-arms was able to break it up. Two years before that, a senator from South Carolina walked up to a fellow senator from Massachusetts on the senate floor and started beating him with a cane, and nearly killed him. Political tensions are nothing new, and many see parallels between our political divide today and that of the days leading up to the Civil War. -
Introduction
Introduction Introduction In this book I have gathered documents that show how war tax resistance devel- oped in the Society of Friends in America and how Quaker war tax resistance was seen by other Americans. These documents highlight the search for truth within the Society of Friends as well as the interest, concern, and occasional aggravation of those outside of the Society who found themselves trying to understand or nav- igate the Quaker point of view. Here, I’ll introduce some of the common themes found in these documents. The bounds to Quaker taxpaying were marked by two Biblical instructions in particular, found in Romans 13 and Acts 5. The first says: Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resists the power, resists the ordinance of God.... ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For for this cause pay ye tribute also... The second provides an exception to the rule: We ought to obey God rather than men. Much of the debate about Quaker war tax resistance, both inside the Society of Friends and with its critics, centered on how liberally this exception was to be interpreted. Does providing funds to help the government make war violate God’s commands in a way that triggers this exception, or are today’s higher powers no less deserving of tribute than was Cæsar in his day? A typical Quaker war tax resistance position went something like this: We must cheerfully pay taxes for the support of civil government even when that gov- ernment uses the tax money to fund a budget that includes military spending, but we must refuse to pay any tax that is levied expressly for the purpose of conduct- ing a war or supporting the military. -
The Greatest Commandment Matthew 22: 34-46; Psalm 90: 1-6, 13-17; I Thes
The Greatest Commandment Matthew 22: 34-46; Psalm 90: 1-6, 13-17; I Thes. 2: 1-8 It’s been a long campaign season. We should be used to incidents like this - people trying to trip up the opponent with trick questions. Well, we can’t even get away from it even in the bible – can we? But before we tackle today’s story, let’s once again take a step back. I have been following the lectionary the past number of messages and concentrating on gospel passages from Matthew. Mostly we have heard Jesus telling parables about the kingdom of heaven, the reign of God. We end up with lessons like: • The first shall be last and the last shall be first. • It is better to actually do the work than to have the right beliefs about the work. • The great banquet is prepared and all are invited. These parables and lessons are good news for many of those who are following Jesus, for the disciples and others in the large crowds that surround Jesus. But these are not comforting parables or visions for the Pharisees and Sadducees. Part of the time they don’t understand what Jesus is talking about. When they do understand, they don’t like what they hear. The establishment (in this case the religious leaders) is not big on being dissed in public. To save face the Pharisees and Sadducees try to get back at Jesus. We didn’t get to these readings, but you probably remember the stories. Earlier in Matthew 22, the Pharisees try out some trick questions on Jesus. -
Of Risks and Remedies: Best Practices in Tax Rulings Transparency.” Leandra Lederman Indiana University Maurer School of Law
FALL 2020 NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW “Of Risks and Remedies: Best Practices in Tax Rulings Transparency.” Leandra Lederman Indiana University Maurer School of Law September 29, 2020 Via Zoom Time: 2:00 – 3:50 p.m. EST Week 6 SCHEDULE FOR FALL 2020 NYU TAX POLICY COLLOQUIUM (All sessions meet online on Tuesdays, from 2:00 to 3:50 pm EST) 1. Tuesday, August 25 – Steven Dean, NYU Law School. “A Constitutional Moment in Cross-Border Taxation.” 2. Tuesday, September 1 – Clinton Wallace, University of South Carolina School of Law. “Democratic Justice in Tax Policymaking.” 3. Tuesday, September 8 – Natasha Sarin, University of Pennsylvania Law School. “Understanding the Revenue Potential of Tax Compliance Investments.” 4. Tuesday, September 15 – Adam Kern, Princeton Politics Department and NYU Law School. “Illusions of Justice in International Taxation.” 5. Tuesday, September 22 – Henrik Kleven, Princeton Economics Department. “The EITC and the Extensive Margin: A Reappraisal.” 6. Tuesday, September 29 – Leandra Lederman, Indiana University Maurer School of Law. “Of Risks and Remedies: Best Practices in Tax Rulings Transparency.” 7. Tuesday, October 6 – Daniel Shaviro, NYU Law School. “What Are Minimum Taxes, and Why Might One Favor or Disfavor Them?” 8. Tuesday, October 13 – Steve Rosenthal, Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. “Tax Implications of the Shifting Ownership of U.S. Stock.” 9. Tuesday, October 20 – Michelle Layser, University of Illinois College of Law. “How Place-Based Tax Incentives Can Reduce Economic Inequality.” 10. Tuesday, October 27 – Gabriel Zucman, University of California, Berkeley. “The Rise of Income and Wealth Inequality in America: Evidence from Distributional Macroeconomic Accounts.” 11.